A place to enjoy and learn about chess

Search form

Main menu

Lessons from Bobby Fischer

His book, My 60 Memorable Games, was one
of the first adult books on chess I bought, and while it was far
too hard for me at the time (and still is, I fear) there is much to
be mined in its pages. Each time I come back to it I learn
something new, and I have selected some positions below which have
taught me something in each phase of the game.

Many years ago Reti described "Americanism" in the chess of
Pillsbury and others, a sort of full-blooded practical-minded style
- and in Fischer's play it is easy to see a parallel.

1. Nf3 c5 2. b3 d5 3. Bb2 f6

Now that's what I call a move. Having been reared on Chernev's
adulation of Capablanca, I got the idea that you should play in the
opening only the most natural and harmonious of moves. Now here is
Fischer, in the Candidate's Final to qualify to play Spassky, and
he is declaring his intention to refute his opponent's opening
using three Pawn moves as Black.

This game had a terrible effect on me, I often still
can't resist trying to refute my opponent's odd moves immediately.
Although Petrosian fumbles at the end you can see how Fischer's
grip on the game never relaxes.

In one of his games, Fischer describes having the attack on the
fianchettoed Black King's position down to a science: open the
h-file, "sac, sac, ...mate!"

Once you see it done, you can imitate it with effect. It
is less usual for these straightforward attacks to be successful at
master level, but among club players my money is on the player with
a plan they understand.

A far more complex attacking game. Lasker once said that no-one can
hope to master chess who does not take on the Ruy Lopez in all its
manifestations; Fischer's games feature many striking successes in
a surprising variety of lines, from the Exchange to the Steinitz,
and as below, what we now call the Zaitsev, played by the then
Soviet Champion.

This was an interesting game for me. I'd got the hang of Pawn
weakness and while I knew that having a weakness didn't mean you
should resign, I think it's fair to say I was much more impressed
with Pawns than pieces!

"Black's "ugly" defence is based on sound positional
considerations: once he can consolidate, there is strong potential
in the two Bishops coupled with the beautifully posted Knight and
compact Pawn mass. These assets, in the long run, hopefully should
outweigh the temporary weakness of his King and the immobile target
on e6. "

"After the game, Olafsson scolded me: "How can you
play an ending like this so fast?" (I'd only been taking a few
seconds a move for the last dozen moves or so.) "Because there's no
danger. It's a dead draw," I replied. "

[52... Rh5 53. Rc5 Rxc5 54. Kxc5

[54. bxc5?? b4-+ ]

54... Kc7 55. Kxb5 Kb7

with the opposition, a book draw and easy to hold]

53. Kxb5?

"As Olafsson showed me, White can win with 53. Rc7+!
It's hard to believe. I stayed up all night analysing, finally
convincing myself and, incidentally, learning a lot about Rook and
Pawn endings in the process."

(Gligoric failed to point it out in his notes to the Bled
tournament book.)

[53. Rc7+! This helps keep the Black King away, so
the White King can control the Queening square. If the Black Rook
checks, White will interpose the Rook. 53... Kd6

"...Horrible as White's Pawn structure may be, Black
can't exploit it because he'll be unable to develop his King's-side
normally. It's the little quirks like this that could make life
difficult for a chess machine."

Quotes

"Many players, even of a high calibre, will assert, half jokingly and half seriously, that a difficult labour of analysis can be replaced by intuition. 'I played this move in a flash - it was obvious it couldn't be bad' is the sort of thing we often hear in a post-mortem.